Ποιειν Και Πραττειν - create and do

You are here: Home » Europe » European Union » EU Cultural Policy » Civil Society and the three Cultural Platforms » Platform for Cultural and Creative Industries » Report of plenary meeting 2012

Report of plenary meeting 2012

 



 

Platform on the potential of Cultural and Creative Industries

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Plenary Meeting

6 February 2012 – Centre Borschette (Room: 3B, 3rd floor) in Brussels

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Report

● 9.30-10.00

Present included Ilona Kish (CAE1), Yvonne Thiec (Eurocinema) David Kavanagh (FSE) and Cecile Despringe (SAA), representatives of PEARLE and Elizabeth of FERA, IMPALA, EMO and other familiar organisations.

● 10.00-11.00

Debriefing on the EC Culture Forum and the Platform’s 2011 workshops and recommendations

Five (5) workshops were organised and recommendations issued in October to all the EU institutions.

No one remarked about what they think about the recommendations. Basically they comprise requests for new programmes and initiatives like using structural funds for funding culture from the EC.

Ilona Kish had expressed her views at the platform’s last meeting. She described the forum as being more like a conference rather than a forum. She did say that the Platform’s forum in Lisbon was ‘aweful’ (her word not mine), and then she said it would have been better to have more well-known speakers. The session about Creative Europe seemed to have been a very difficult one, and thus was a bit of a missed opportunity. It did not deal with the current financial crisis.

Another person said that too many men in the 50s attended.

According to the European Music Office (EMO) which seems to lead the platforms along with EAC, they did report that the EC found the recommendations as ‘helpful’. And ‘interesting’. Certainly the recommendations were considered in the drafting of the Creative Europe Programme.

The recommendations are on the website, presumably that of the EMO and also of DG EAC.

From a Swedish NGO called EMTAC organising a network of creative workers and organisations, the view was expressed that a way forward was to bring together the creative industries.

The EC representatives were asked if they have made any recommendations to the Council.  It seemed to me that there had not been made any.

The organisations present did say that they have send the recommendations to their members, but none have sent them to governments. This is probably something the members could do, but they cannot be forced to do it.

Elizabeth (FERA)

She explained that this platform was meant to have a structured dialogue between stakeholders and EC, but in her view the platform failed in doing this, and this is visible regarding the Creative Europe Programme. But there is time to change this. For example, any discussion in the audio-visual Council of the EU should use the platform’s work and thus emphasize the cultural dimension. The dialogue has been quite bad and some ‘communication therapy’ (her words not mine) would be needed.

● 11.00-12.00

European Commission: 2012 objectives and mandate for the platform

Xavier Troussard – after briefly describing the work of the EC in education and culture, started to focus on EC’s work on digitisation, globalisation and Creative Europe Programme. Indeed, the EC is now looking broadly at the new structure which it has created, i.e., Creative Europe is ‘broad’.

His key points:

Fabian of EMO representative mentioned how very difficult it is to get culture included in structural funding.

Some-one raised, that that platform failed to discuss the financial crisis. She asked what is the view of the EC on linking culture to combating the ill effects of the financial crisis.

Ilona Kish asked the EC if they has seen the leaked Common Strategic Document on structural funds, which seems quite detrimental to culture.

Jean-Marc of EMO also talked about the importance of lobbying for structural funds. He feels there is progress.

Representative of the Federation of European Publishers said that so far some money has gone to translation, but they welcome the ‘creative sector’ position adopted by the EC. Meaning being more industry minded and less sectorial.

Cecile Despringe asked the EC what exactly is asked of the culture sector, especially regarding negotiations with Council

Other diverse comments were made including on creativity meaning different things across Europe.

In response to the above remarks Xavier Troussard said that the EC will not change its timetable on negotiations and above all dialogue with the sector. The EC does not want to be forced into making decisions. Indeed, the EC will now commission some-one to evaluate the entire process carried out by the platforms. This evaluation will be more like a review and in the spring the EC will have a consultation meeting with the platform’s members.

As for criticisms on EC focusing on employment, here he warned us not to have any illusions, because the pressures to cut the budget is real and the EC cannot present in this period a programme that can be criticised for not understanding the current financial situation. Therefore the EC has to explain the positive role of culture in a time of crisis.

Regarding the ‘Common Strategy Framework (document)’ this is still being debated. It is being shrunk to the level where there is no detail, so he feels that much more debate within the EC is taking place and for sure the Council will demand more clarity.

The EC is considering a further communication which will link up with the results of the Green Paper on audio-visual. This could be a ‘land-mark’ communication.

Creative Europe would give grants, but also support loans. The EC is interested in supporting ‘business plans’ and in the context of these the EC may give loans.

On international dimension, the EC wants the EU to become a common cultural space and therefore in the EU’s work culture would become one of its main tools. Xavier mentioned something about coming into Europe, the passenger experiences a ‘cultural ticket’

Creative Europe is not interested in competitiveness, but it is interested in strengthening capacity and this includes strengthening networks of non-commercial organisations.

The Danish presidency was discussed with regards to the position taken on the Creative Europe programme and the idea of using culture for international purposes. He mentioned that the EC is very interested in exporting cultural goods and services, and that this is a new opportunity. It is being raised through the open method of co-ordination.

Ilona Kish mentioned that her sources of information is that the Danish Presidency has not been very favourable regarding the Creative Europe programme.

Xavier Troussard explained the positioning of the Danish Presidency regarding the Creative Europe Programme, namely that this is more of a general discussion about cutting the EU budget. They are putting pressure on all programmes. The negotiations are going to be a tough battle.

Ilona Kish reiterated the point, that it is very difficult to some-how justify the case for supporting the Creative programme for culture, so what would the EC suggest?

Xavier Troussard stated that 'Creative Europe' has done an impact assessment and investigated on how to improve the sector.  It is one of the few sectors where employment is not shrinking, and therefore proves to be a good investment.

Elizabeth of FERA said that a fair bit of miss-understandings have flared up and how can this be avoided.

Cecile Despringe, praised the platform, feels that it has delivered. She did say that the EC’s was sorely missed (I think this is what she said, her English for once failed her).

Xavier Troussard – mentioned to Cecile Despringe that a conference was about what the EC is doing or not doing, but that it was not organised by the EC nor was the EC invited.  I did not understand his answer to Elisabeth.

● 13.00 – 14.30

Presentation of candidatures

Election of the Presidency – Secretariat – Board

So far persons who wish to be on the board:

Current board:

General discussion about what the responsibilities of the board should be. Also some talk about funding. It seems the Creative Europe Programme says nothing about funding the platform. Basically, the EC is evaluating the platform, and there will be no money until this evaluation is completed. The EC evaluation starts in June and it hopes by 2014 it will be ready to consider re-supporting the platform.

The platform even questioned what its role is. Some suggested that it should re-invent itself as a lobby and the board should lobby. This of course is ambitious, because the Platform was created by the EC to simply be a link with stakeholders.

In conclusion:

Existing board’s mandate was renewed

Seven (7) people were elected, basically the last board, plus GESAC and SAA. WCA dropped out. EMO remains as the secretariat

Yvette remains as president.

Board will meet as soon as possible to discuss Creative Europe Programme and improving the structured dialogue with the EC before June 2012.

● 15.00 – 17.00

Work plan 2012 – this was part of the general discussion in selecting the board.

● Next meeting - the board will discuss this and a meeting will probably take place in June2012.

 

Written by P.M.

 

1 Culture Action Europe (CAE), formerly European for the European Forum for Arts and Heritage (EFAH).

^ Top

« Platform for Cultural and Creative Industries | Open Letter to Barroso about TPIP 2013 »